[prolly_a_moron]

>Inflation adjustment doesn't take into account costs that are prevalent in an era but totally absent in another: like internet access, cellphone bills, and such. Nor how much one not puts into their retirement account / savings to spend on daily needs.

Yes it does. Have you looked at how the BLS calculates the market-basket they use for CPI calculations? It's determined by actual spending by actual people on actual goods. This information is public:

"Knowing that consumers are constantly offered new items to include in their market basket, how do changing market baskets influence the CPI? The answer is not unambiguous and depends on the importance of the change in terms of total expenditures by consumers."

https://www.bls.gov/ore/abstract/st/st950200.htm

[coldtea]

>Yes it does. Have you looked at how the BLS calculates the market-basket they use for CPI calculations? It's determined by actual spending by actual people on actual goods.

The CPI calculation does take into account "new expenses", but in a backwards way from what I asked for above and for the reverse purpose (to hide the negative changes).

Instead of just adding something like a cell contract into the "new necessities" in the basket, they substitute lesser goods instead of comparing like for like across periods, as if it's reflecting a difference in what people want to buy (aka the "burger vs steak" substitution) instead of what they can afford to buy. They have even long substituted home owning costs for rent. So, yeah, "it's not inflation", it's just a declining standard of living instead of a fixed (or progressing) one.

[yummyfajitas]

If they compared like to like, inflation would be far lower. Comparing like to like directly asks the question "how much would it cost to live a 1970 lifestyle in 2017".

As you conceded above, that would be pretty cheap.